The Climate Crisis—Culprits and Liability: Contribution of South Korea’s Top Ten Emitting Corporates to Climate Loss & Damage

Back

Jeongho Jo

Researcher

Soyeon Lim

Communications Officer

About

The climate crisis is no longer a distant possibility but a present threat and harsh reality. Climate disasters—heatwaves, torrential rains, droughts, and wildfires—have become part of daily life, inflicting severe damage across societies and economies. Yet debates on responsibility for greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and the climate crisis have remained largely on the national level. Until recently, few studies directly linked individual corporations’ emissions to climate loss and damage. Now, the emerging concept of carbon liability has gained traction in global scholarship, spurring efforts to quantify the climate impacts of cumulative corporate emissions and pushing the boundaries of the carbon liability discourse in the legal and financial spheres. A landmark example is the Nature publication by Callahan and Mankin (2025). The study establishes the connection between corporate GHG emissions and climate disasters and translates them into measurable economic losses and potential compensation. Building on their approach, this study applies the methodology to South Korea’s ten largest corporate emitters, quantifying their contributions to heatwave-related losses from past emissions and projecting future losses under two mitigation scenarios for 2025–2050—offering a data-driven basis for the question: Who is responsible, and how much should each entity be held liable?

Download report

Executive summary

This study applies the methodology from Callahan and Mankin (2025) to quantify heatwave-related economic losses attributable to South Korea’s ten largest corporate emitters, drawing on their historical emissions (2011–2023) and modeled scenarios for the future (2025–2050).

Based on historical data from 2011–2023, the cumulative emissions from the ten corporate emitters are estimated at approximately 4.1 billion tCO₂-eq (43.5 percent of the national total for the same period). The resulting heatwave-related losses are valued at USD 119.6 billion (approx. KRW 161 trillion). POSCO alone accounts for USD 28.1 billion (approx. KRW 38 trillion), while the five KEPCO-affiliated power generators together represent USD 72.9 billion (approx. KRW 98 trillion). These figures provide empirical evidence of the scale of corporate accountability for GHG emissions and their contributions to losses.

Under a Current Policy (CurPol) trajectory, cumulative losses are projected at USD 518.9 billion (approx. KRW 700 trillion). By contrast, Net Zero pathway, could keep losses to USD 204.7 billion (approx. KRW 276 trillion), avoiding an estimated USD 314.2 billion (approx. KRW 424 trillion) in damages. The implication is clear: net-zero policies are not optional add-ons but an essential cornerstone. Failure to pursue carbon neutrality will lead to escalating economic and social costs.

Because this analysis considers only heatwave events, the true scale of damage would be far greater if floods, droughts, wildfires, and other hazards were included. By providing scientific evidence that links individual corporate emissions to quantifiable losses, this study offers a compelling case for establishing practical emissions reduction frameworks at both the national and corporate levels.

Key findings

1. Past Loss Contributions (2011–2023)

Top Ten Corporate Emitters: Cumulative emissions of approx. 4.1 billion tCO₂-eq and contribution to heatwave-attributable loss of USD 119.6 billion (approx. KRW 161 trillion)
Emissions from the top ten emitters account for 43.5 percent of the domestic total during the same period

2. Future Loss Projections (2025–2050)

Potential reductions in cumulative emissions: approx. 10.8 billion tCO₂-eq
Avoidable losses: approx. USD 314.7 billion (approx. KRW 424 trillion)
Avoidable losses by top ten emitters: approx. USD 136.6 billion (approx. KRW 184 trillion)

3. Limitations and Expandability

The loss coefficient α₁₉₉₀ (USD 29.07 /tonne; on the basis of cumulative emissions since 1990) is applied, and the analysis was confined to heatwaves only, thus restricting the scope of estimated losses.
The magnitude of losses would soar if the α₁₈₅₀ loss coefficient (based on cumulative emissions since 1850), which is approximately 1.5 times the value of α₁₉₉₀, were applied and other climate impacts such as floods, droughts, and wildfires were also factored in.

4. Conclusion and Insights

To proactively address the climate crisis, a more inclusive principle of carbon liability that goes beyond the national level to consider corporations and a practical reduction implementation framework should be established.